Forums: Skydiving: General Skydiving Discussions:
New rules for canopy-downsizing in Norway. We need comments!

 

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 Next page Last page  View All

virgin-burner

Mar 17, 2012, 4:27 AM
Post #101 of 125 (1039 views)
Shortcut
Re: [daleskydive] New rules for canopy-downsizing in Norway. We need comments! [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I dont know about a madatory canopy course for renewing you licence.It seems a bit over the top. I you have a couple of mandatory canopy control courses ,then once done and achieved you already have the knowledge and skills. Im not a fan of more and more rules. Wouldnt it be better to try and make an attitude at the DZ that doing a canopy control or swooping course a cool thing to do.[/reply]

it is where i jump! Smile

it might be a little over the top, you're right. why not tie getting your B, C, D etc. to making a course mandatory..

most people dont jump during the winter, you forget over the time, you havent picked up something the first time around, you get into more advanced maneouvres, bigger turns etc. well, if you do get into *canopy-piloting" that is, of course.

the people that scare me the most are the ones that say "the parachute's only there to bring me to the ground safely". well, if that's your way of thinking, ok; BUT.. i shit you not sherlock, if it wasnt for the parachute you'd be dead every time you jump from a plane. why not educate yourself on that part of the skydive? and why not make that education mandatory. apparently, it's the biggest killer in the sport, so it's in your best interest, isnt it!?


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Mar 21, 2012, 12:30 AM
Post #102 of 125 (986 views)
Shortcut
Re: [virgin-burner] New rules for canopy-downsizing in Norway. We need comments! [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
the people that scare me the most are the ones that say "the parachute's only there to bring me to the ground safely".
Why is that? That's the whole purpose for a parachute - to bring me to the ground safely. Do you assume those people have no clue on safe canopy flight?


In reply to:
....and why not make that education mandatory. apparently, it's the biggest killer in the sport, so it's in your best interest, isnt it!?
Agreed, yes.


virgin-burner

Mar 21, 2012, 4:48 PM
Post #103 of 125 (940 views)
Shortcut
Re: [popsjumper] New rules for canopy-downsizing in Norway. We need comments! [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
the people that scare me the most are the ones that say "the parachute's only there to bring me to the ground safely".
Why is that? That's the whole purpose for a parachute - to bring me to the ground safely. Do you assume those people have no clue on safe canopy flight?

it does in fact imply they're only interested in the freefall-part of the skydive, and the parachute is their freefall-fun-vehicle, used for only that. and that is wrong.


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Mar 22, 2012, 1:57 AM
Post #104 of 125 (915 views)
Shortcut
Re: [virgin-burner] New rules for canopy-downsizing in Norway. We need comments! [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
the people that scare me the most are the ones that say "the parachute's only there to bring me to the ground safely".
Why is that? That's the whole purpose for a parachute - to bring me to the ground safely. Do you assume those people have no clue on safe canopy flight?

it does in fact imply they're only interested in the freefall-part of the skydive, and the parachute is their freefall-fun-vehicle, used for only that. and that is wrong.
Nope. Not at all. You are severely mistaken.


dragon2  (D 101989)

Mar 22, 2012, 4:42 AM
Post #105 of 125 (902 views)
Shortcut
Re: [virgin-burner] New rules for canopy-downsizing in Norway. We need comments! [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
the people that scare me the most are the ones that say "the parachute's only there to bring me to the ground safely".
Why is that? That's the whole purpose for a parachute - to bring me to the ground safely. Do you assume those people have no clue on safe canopy flight?

it does in fact imply they're only interested in the freefall-part of the skydive, and the parachute is their freefall-fun-vehicle, used for only that. and that is wrong.

I agree with you there. I see a fair number of jumpers (mostly FS girls it seems), who fly smaller stilettos and similar, but never "do" anything with them.

I've always thought it is smarter in that case to upsize a bit, say to a 135-150ish pilot/safire. Just because in the event that you really have to fly your canopy, like when you're getting cut-off or landing out or landing with a little bit of wind, these jumpers have issues.


craigbey  (C 31991)

Mar 22, 2012, 5:05 AM
Post #106 of 125 (897 views)
Shortcut
Re: [dragon2] New rules for canopy-downsizing in Norway. We need comments! [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
I agree with you there. I see a fair number of jumpers (mostly FS girls it seems), who fly smaller stilettos and similar, but never "do" anything with them.

Add to that the number of jumpers who NEVER take the time to dedicate a jump to focus on CC. They fly their bodies, deploy, and then 'ride' the canopy down.


cavscout73  (C 40414)

Mar 23, 2012, 10:23 AM
Post #107 of 125 (845 views)
Shortcut
Re: [virgin-burner] New rules for canopy-downsizing in Norway. We need comments! [In reply to] Can't Post

We were just discussing cc at our dz a few weeks back . Our s&TA and dzo has put more of a focus on cc for students . Not to mention its really cool to see jumpers at any given day planning their jumps not only on what 4way, track dive etc. But also hey why dont we work on canopy stuff. Flat turns ,crosswind down wind, rear riser landings and so on . We dont do it because of some rule that says you must but because we are able to make learning fun. Any aspect of canopy whether its maneuvers or wingloading etc. Putting more rules in place will not do much in the long run , it really comes down to each dzo and s&ta finding ways to build better skydivers. rules tend to piss people off and they find ways around them , but if you can make learning fun and challenging for the jumper it will go a long way.


virgin-burner

Mar 23, 2012, 6:04 PM
Post #108 of 125 (817 views)
Shortcut
Re: [cavscout73] New rules for canopy-downsizing in Norway. We need comments! [In reply to] Can't Post

and that is WHY-I-THINK-25-JUMPS-ARE-NOT-ENOUGH-FOR-A-LICENCE-OF-ANY-KIND. you just CANNOT be a safe skydiver. it's hardly enough to learn to fly a proper pattern or so it seems.

you can bang that out in a week, EASY. how many times have you had strong, light, variable, maybe crosswind-experience during that time!?

i dont know how to make it any bolder than this.

and pops, you just like disagreeing with me for the sake of it, fine. troll someone else.


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Mar 23, 2012, 8:14 PM
Post #109 of 125 (810 views)
Shortcut
Re: [dragon2] New rules for canopy-downsizing in Norway. We need comments! [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I see a fair number of jumpers (mostly FS girls it seems), who fly smaller stilettos and similar, but never "do" anything with them.

I've always thought it is smarter in that case to upsize a bit, say to a 135-150ish pilot/safire. Just because in the event that you really have to fly your canopy, like when you're getting cut-off or landing out or landing with a little bit of wind, these jumpers have issues.

What is it you want them to "do"? Don't say swoop.

Evidently, you, like VB, assume that because they don't "do something" with their canopy that they don't know what they are doing.

In many cases you are right and that applies across the board to all canopy sizes. In many cases, you are not.


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Mar 23, 2012, 8:21 PM
Post #110 of 125 (807 views)
Shortcut
Re: [virgin-burner] New rules for canopy-downsizing in Norway. We need comments! [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
and that is WHY-I-THINK-25-JUMPS-ARE-NOT-ENOUGH-FOR-A-LICENCE-OF-ANY-KIND. you just CANNOT be a safe skydiver. it's hardly enough to learn to fly a proper pattern or so it seems.

you can bang that out in a week, EASY. how many times have you had strong, light, variable, maybe crosswind-experience during that time!?

i dont know how to make it any bolder than this.
Bold. Yes, How bold? Are you saying that one must experience all those things before getting a license?

In reply to:
and pops, you just like disagreeing with me for the sake of it, fine. troll someone else.
Evidently you failed to comprehend the message. Evidently, those who do not agree with you are trolls. Wrong again.

It's easy to disagree with statements that are not well thought out.


dragon2  (D 101989)

Mar 24, 2012, 12:05 AM
Post #111 of 125 (794 views)
Shortcut
Re: [popsjumper] New rules for canopy-downsizing in Norway. We need comments! [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
I see a fair number of jumpers (mostly FS girls it seems), who fly smaller stilettos and similar, but never "do" anything with them.

I've always thought it is smarter in that case to upsize a bit, say to a 135-150ish pilot/safire. Just because in the event that you really have to fly your canopy, like when you're getting cut-off or landing out or landing with a little bit of wind, these jumpers have issues.

What is it you want them to "do"? Don't say swoop.

Evidently, you, like VB, assume that because they don't "do something" with their canopy that they don't know what they are doing.

In many cases you are right and that applies across the board to all canopy sizes. In many cases, you are not.

I'm not talking about swooping at all. Rather about doing more than just "going along for the ride", like doing flat turns, flare turns, land cross/downwind etc.

Like I said, some of the jumpersI know get all worked up if they have to land their stiletto 120 on zero wind days in a set direction because "that's downwind" and they just won't do it.

I think a number of the low turn incidents we've had (not the swooping ones, but the into-the-wind and avoidance ones) fall into this group and could have been prevented by practicing and active flying every once in a while, instead of just using the canopy as a ride on each and every jump.

That's what I mean by "do".


cavscout73  (C 40414)

Mar 24, 2012, 10:59 AM
Post #112 of 125 (780 views)
Shortcut
Re: [virgin-burner] New rules for canopy-downsizing in Norway. We need comments! [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
and that is WHY-I-THINK-25-JUMPS-ARE-NOT-ENOUGH-FOR-A-LICENCE-OF-ANY-KIND. you just CANNOT be a safe skydiver. it's hardly enough to learn to fly a proper pattern or so it seems.

you can bang that out in a week, EASY. how many times have you had strong, light, variable, maybe crosswind-experience during that time!?

i dont know how to make it any bolder than this.

If you cant fly a basic pattern by 25 jumps then to me that seems like a failure not only on the student but also on the instructors or coaches.
And 25 is the minimum jumps to get that license. Provided you meet all the criteria. Would i have wanted to do the A license in a week ? Hell no thats just way too much info crammed in a very short time.
But one thing that boggles me on this site is the experienced jumpers always saying you shouldnt get this licence or that rating at whatever the standard is at now , but think about when you were getting that license or rating did you keep yourself from getting it because you thought the standard was too low? I highly doubt that is true most times.
It seems to me that there are a ton of double standards around here.


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Mar 25, 2012, 5:18 AM
Post #113 of 125 (755 views)
Shortcut
Re: [dragon2] New rules for canopy-downsizing in Norway. We need comments! [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I'm not talking about swooping at all. Rather about doing more than just "going along for the ride", like doing flat turns, flare turns, land cross/downwind etc.
Agreed. "Doing something" involves learning flying skills...not so much as to how you fly after your freefall but more about what you know about canopy flight.

My point was simply that many of us who enjoy the freefall much more than the canopy flight DID those things to learn about canopy flight. We simply fly conservative flight paths to get us down safely for the next freefall.

Your point seems to be that many don't learn decent canopy flight....and yes, you would be right, unfortunately for all of us. And that applies regardless of what discipline one prefers over another.

We're talking at cross-purposes. I do agree wholeheartedly the everyone should learn and practice safe canopy flight...but that has nothing to do with how I view freefall vs canopy flight.


In reply to:
Like I said, some of the jumpers I know get all worked up if they have to land their stiletto 120 on zero wind days in a set direction because "that's downwind" and they just won't do it.
Yep...that could indicate a lack of knowledge and/or skill.

I could be that the canopy-downsizing rules will help reduce the number of those incidents.


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Mar 25, 2012, 5:33 AM
Post #114 of 125 (754 views)
Shortcut
Re: [cavscout73] New rules for canopy-downsizing in Norway. We need comments! [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
If you cant fly a basic pattern by 25 jumps then to me that seems like a failure not only on the student but also on the instructors or coaches.
I would agree with that. We, as instructors, coaches and mentors, could do a lot more towards helping the youngsters along.

In reply to:
But one thing that boggles me on this site is the experienced jumpers always saying you shouldnt get this licence or that rating at whatever the standard is at now , but think about when you were getting that license or rating did you keep yourself from getting it because you thought the standard was too low? I highly doubt that is true most times.
It seems to me that there are a ton of double standards around here.

Well, it may be that you are incorrectly applying a generalization across the board here.

Yes, there are cases, too many IMO, of people getting ratings by barely meeting the existing requirements as they stand. How many of them are posting in DZ.com I have no idea but I'm reluctant to apply that generalization to those in here although I'm sure that there are some here that do fall into the category.

On the one hand, many of us have taken a more realistic view and are capable of realistic self-evaluation to determine readiness for advanced ratings and responsibilities.

On the other hand, even those who DO fall into that generalization and are now calling for more strict rules and/or regulations aren't necessarily hypocrites. People DO come to new realizations and DO change their opinions, even men, and DO support more stringent requirements.

So, bottom line, it's tough to call "hypocrite" without knowing the mindset of the poster that calls for raising the bar. But, yes, in the big scheme of things, I'm sure you are correct in some cases.


craigbey  (C 31991)

Mar 25, 2012, 9:17 AM
Post #115 of 125 (732 views)
Shortcut
Re: [popsjumper] New rules for canopy-downsizing in Norway. We need comments! [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
My point was simply that many of us who enjoy the freefall much more than the canopy flight DID those things to learn about canopy flight. We simply fly conservative flight paths to get us down safely for the next freefall.

Your point seems to be that many don't learn decent canopy flight....and yes, you would be right, unfortunately for all of us. And that applies regardless of what discipline one prefers over another.

So you did or you didn't. Which one?

When did you last dedicate a jump to focus on CC?


cavscout73  (C 40414)

Mar 25, 2012, 4:33 PM
Post #116 of 125 (708 views)
Shortcut
Re: [popsjumper] New rules for canopy-downsizing in Norway. We need comments! [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
If you cant fly a basic pattern by 25 jumps then to me that seems like a failure not only on the student but also on the instructors or coaches.
I would agree with that. We, as instructors, coaches and mentors, could do a lot more towards helping the youngsters along.

In reply to:
But one thing that boggles me on this site is the experienced jumpers always saying you shouldnt get this licence or that rating at whatever the standard is at now , but think about when you were getting that license or rating did you keep yourself from getting it because you thought the standard was too low? I highly doubt that is true most times.
It seems to me that there are a ton of double standards around here.

Well, it may be that you are incorrectly applying a generalization across the board here.

Yes, there are cases, too many IMO, of people getting ratings by barely meeting the existing requirements as they stand. How many of them are posting in DZ.com I have no idea but I'm reluctant to apply that generalization to those in here although I'm sure that there are some here that do fall into the category.

On the one hand, many of us have taken a more realistic view and are capable of realistic self-evaluation to determine readiness for advanced ratings and responsibilities.

On the other hand, even those who DO fall into that generalization and are now calling for more strict rules and/or regulations aren't necessarily hypocrites. People DO come to new realizations and DO change their opinions, even men, and DO support more stringent requirements.

So, bottom line, it's tough to call "hypocrite" without knowing the mindset of the poster that calls for raising the bar. But, yes, in the big scheme of things, I'm sure you are correct in some cases.
Quote:
Yes it is a big generalization and you may be right also. IMO what i see a lot of on here is at least on face value a lot of double standards. Now i very well may be wrong and really hope i am.
but i am still a firm believer in stop with adding new rules. A good start would be to better train jumpers on the standards already in place.
There are so many ways to improve what is already there without imposing new rules.
Dz's hold a short clinic during the weekend pick different topics , anything from spotting to cc and everything in between , just speaking from my experience and what i see at our dz is any time us newer guys have an opportunity to lesrn something new in any aspect of the sport , there are always quite a few that are right there ready to learn. now if that could bcome a regularly organized thing at our dz's, we would have smarter safer jumpers out there without having to put in new rules. Challenge the dropzones to make it a safer sport through knowledge not regulation.


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Mar 25, 2012, 5:56 PM
Post #117 of 125 (698 views)
Shortcut
Re: [craigbey] New rules for canopy-downsizing in Norway. We need comments! [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
So you did or you didn't. Which one?

When did you last dedicate a jump to focus on CC?
I did, obviously. About 200-250 jumps practicing CC.

The last dedicated CC one? Oh, I guess 50-60 jumps ago re-drilling flat turns and rear riser flares.

The last accuracy one? 2 jumps ago for rear riser flight and landing accuracy.


(This post was edited by popsjumper on Mar 25, 2012, 5:56 PM)


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Mar 25, 2012, 6:37 PM
Post #118 of 125 (692 views)
Shortcut
Re: [cavscout73] New rules for canopy-downsizing in Norway. We need comments! [In reply to] Can't Post

 I'll add my opinions after I respond to your other questions, OK?


In reply to:
...but i am still a firm believer in stop with adding new rules.
Here is one area that we disagree. Yes, we currently have rules and they are currently being ignored on a wide basis so what's the point of adding new rules?

In reply to:
A good start would be to better train jumpers on the standards already in place.
Agreed. So in the same light as above, we currently have training opportunities that are currently being ignored so what's the point of the creating new training?

In reply to:
There are so many ways to improve what is already there without imposing new rules.
And those ways have been in existence for God knows how long and you know where we are today.

In reply to:
Dz's hold a short clinic during the weekend pick different topics .... we would have smarter safer jumpers out there without having to put in new rules.
Yes, in an ideal world all that is wonderful. It hasn't happened that way as yet.

In reply to:
Challenge the dropzones to make it a safer sport through knowledge not regulation.
And here's where MY personal pessimism comes in. There are two main topics I want to touch on here.

1. DZs, as a group, are a business. History has shown that all too often business decisions pre-empt safety issues. You see it with cutting corners on plane maintenance, gear selection and maintenance, instructor selection and integrity, ad infinitum. A few selected DZs DO good things but alas, many, many do not or can not for varied reasons dealing with the business aspect of it all.

2. Jumpers themselves, even given ample opportunity to learn, all too often do not take advantage of those opportunities. The opportunities available are currently optional with the exception of the minor and I mean MINOR, A-license requirements. USPA, just this year (in how many years of existence?) added requirements for B-license.

So, given the current state of affairs that have been in place and going on for years and years, how are you going to change that mindset that has prevailed for ever so long? It's not going to happen voluntarily...history has proven that, IMO.

What's left is rules and regulations.

When you started skydiving, you had some set rules that you had to follow...those requirements. You didn't complain. You didn't whine about "freedom to do as you want". You went along with those rules and learned under that umbrella.

Initiating new rules will upset those who have grown up under the voluntary system that hasn't worked as well as we would have liked. Indeed, many of them feel as if new rules are violating some constitutional right of freedom to do as they please. So, OK. But what about the youngsters just coming up?

They like you, will grow up under the rules and regulations in place at the time they start.

IMO, initiating new rules will benefit them the most while the oldsters continue to reject the available learning opportunities. No, we can't help those who refuse to learn BUT we CAN help some of the people with new rules as they come along under them.

As far as the DZOs....what are you gonna do? History has shown that as long as there are options, they will take the option that best suits their business. Looking at it from their POV, it's hard to tell them to incorporate new procedures that my affect their bottom line.

In a nutshell, voluntary options have not worked out as well as we had hoped. Maybe set rules and regulations will slowly change things around to having more knowledgeable and safer skydivers in the future.

I think we have all grown too slack in all aspects of skydiving....it relates to the dumbing down of America. Unfortunately for us, dumb can kill.


craigbey  (C 31991)

Mar 26, 2012, 5:28 PM
Post #119 of 125 (646 views)
Shortcut
Re: [popsjumper] New rules for canopy-downsizing in Norway. We need comments! [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
I did, obviously. About 200-250 jumps practicing CC.

The last dedicated CC one? Oh, I guess 50-60 jumps ago re-drilling flat turns and rear riser flares.

The last accuracy one? 2 jumps ago for rear riser flight and landing accuracy.

And there you have part of the solution to the larger problem. If more jumpers would take the time and dedicate jumps to practice basic, essential CC safety skills, there would more jumpers ready to handle the unexpected.


cavscout73  (C 40414)

Mar 27, 2012, 6:31 PM
Post #120 of 125 (611 views)
Shortcut
Re: [craigbey] New rules for canopy-downsizing in Norway. We need comments! [In reply to] Can't Post

 
And there you have part of the solution to the larger problem. If more jumpers would take the time and dedicate jumps to practice basic, essential CC safety skills, there would more jumpers ready to handle the unexpected.Thank you , now take that a step further. Yes dz's have bottom lines to look at , and the system does need a lot of fixing . Maybe my initial thought was a little fairy tale but what is to stop guys like pops or others who have years of experience and thousands of jumps , setting aside a little time at the dz to put stuff together, i highly doubt if one of you were to go to the S&TA and say hey why dont we do "whatever the topic may be" can ya put it on the calender?? Im here to make this a safer sport for everyone and i have so and so rating ... An hour in the class room, or watching some landings. How about people step up to the damn plate and help the situation. If its such a concern " which i do believe it is" why dont our experienced jumpers step up and try helping out....
Now maybe you are and that would rock , but those are the changes needed to fix the issues we have.
If i see pops ( just using you as an experienced name) say hey saturday morning i am taking 2 hours to work with anyone who wishes to practice rear riser landings or whatever it may be. I would be the first to say yeah that sounds good .. lets do it, now will you completely turn things around in one weekend ?? No but over time just think how many jumpers will benefit and how much they can pass on. That is where the real change will come from. It will come from us , not some governing body that says you better do this or else... Seriously its not that hard .. no matter how change comes about it will be slow. But start from the ground up and you will get a better response in the long run.
Again just more of my rambling but my opinions come from many more crazy sports than just skydiving and regulation is not always the answer... Just my .23 cents


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Mar 27, 2012, 6:52 PM
Post #121 of 125 (610 views)
Shortcut
Re: [cavscout73] New rules for canopy-downsizing in Norway. We need comments! [In reply to] Can't Post

No, No, no cavscout...you have some great ideas! Nobody here could realistically argue against any of that.

And yes, as you indicated, some of us actually DO those things. (in my case, I tend to prefer to work one-on-one.)

And yes, more people doing those things would go a long, long way towards improving things.

Even though it would be doing good, it would only be doing good at the micro level whereas we really need something operating on the macro level too.

Personally, and I know it's a pessimistic outlook, I think it would be near impossible to get enough DZs and people doing those things to make a significant difference across the board.

No, I am NOT saying don't do those things because it won't make a big dent. Not saying that at all. We should ALL something no matter how trivial it appears in the grand plan. Every little bit counts and helps.

Anyway, your ideas are right on target and would be a great benefit to those available to take advantage of it.


linnths  (C 92128)

Apr 6, 2012, 4:12 AM
Post #122 of 125 (558 views)
Shortcut
Re: [popsjumper] New rules for canopy-downsizing in Norway. We need comments! [In reply to] Can't Post

Okay people! I am sorry for leaving the discussion here for a while. Went to Elsinore to do some skydiving ;)

Anyways, the Norwegian board has come up with new rules. Fortunately, they made some changes from the first proposal they brought up, but I still find it poor. The new guidelines are very conservative, which for some will be a good thing, for many a bad... Lighter jumpers like myself will not be able to jump smaller canopies than a 135 until more than 1000 jumps. For a skydiver who focuses a lot on acquiring canopy-skills, this seems unfair. The new rules also misses out on the currency-question, which IMO is as important as jump numbers itself. A jumper with 600 jumps a year will be a better pilot than a 2000-jump skydiver who did only 20 jumps last year. You hopefully get my point.

Anyways, I'm attaching the link to the table. Again, it's in norwegian. Weight-classes are in kilograms, and canopy-sizes in sq.feet.

http://nlf.no/..._endelig_versjon.pdf


virgin-burner

Apr 6, 2012, 6:53 AM
Post #123 of 125 (528 views)
Shortcut
Re: [linnths] New rules for canopy-downsizing in Norway. We need comments! [In reply to] Can't Post

what's the number in brackets?


SethInMI  (A 47765)

Apr 6, 2012, 10:27 AM
Post #124 of 125 (509 views)
Shortcut
Re: [linnths] New rules for canopy-downsizing in Norway. We need comments! [In reply to] Can't Post


Google Translated Norwegian to English:

The table is based on the maximum exit weight (jumps including all equipment) are given in kg, and the number of jumps. Each
column applies to the exit weight lower than the weight that is given.
canopy Size in bold indicate the "Recommended minimum canopy size". For many beneficial
use a larger canopy. It must be taken into account factors such as canopy design, skip's skills, the air density
(landing site altitude) and maintenance / number of hops last year.
canopy size in parentheses indicates the "minimum size".
Jumpers to jump a smaller canopy than the main "Recommended minimum canopy size" shall conduct a
Safety talk and considered by the Executive Directors, or the person authorized by the HI. Approval shall be signed
logbook.
High-quality parachutes full-elliptical (more than 20% wingtip loss), may not be used until after 400
jump. Examples of such displays is Katana, Mamba, Crossfire et al
High-quality parachutes are crossbraced, may not be used until after 1000 jumps. Examples of such
monitors are Velocity, Sensei, VX / FX, et al Xaos
HI, or whomever he authorizes, may allow jumpers showing very good skills in display flight, to
skip crossbraced canopies from 800 jumps. The size of the table in question.
For jumpers who use a smaller canopy than the "Recommended minimum canopy size" and "Crossbraced" monitors,
and made less than 40 jumps on this type of canopy last season, should carry a minimum of 3
monitor running jump (separation from other jumpers in time and space) before jumping with others.
Reserve Your monitor should not be less than the minimum canopy size for the main canopy, the rest
refer to the manufacturer's recommendations and restrictions in any case not be exceeded.


pchapman  (D 1014)

Apr 6, 2012, 5:40 PM
Post #125 of 125 (480 views)
Shortcut
Re: [SethInMI] New rules for canopy-downsizing in Norway. We need comments! [In reply to] Can't Post

Based on that translation:

Interesting rules. They are a mix of hard limits, plus exceptions allowed with monitoring, plus recommendations.

Highly elliptical is only allowed after 400 jumps.
Crossbraced is normally 1000, but one can get an exemption at 800 jumps.

Other than those limits, one can downsize below the minimums in the table, IF one gets some approvals. IF less current, one must also demonstrate canopy skills.

Nice to see that there is some flexibility there.


First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Skydiving : General Skydiving Discussions

 


Search for (options)